TMV Partners

Announcement

GO HERE: www.TheModernVocalistWorld.com

ATTENTION TMV WORLD FORUM MEMBERS! YOU NEED TO GO LOGIN AND/OR REGISTER AT THE NEW AND IMPROVED TMV WORLD FORUM SYSTEM.

CLICK THIS LINK TO GO TO THE NEW FORUM. WHEN YOU ARRIVE AT THE NEW FORUM, LOGIN OR REGISTER AND THEN CLICK ON "GETTING STARTED". ALL OF THE POSTS AND TOPICS HAVE BEEN MIGRATED OVER AND EXISTING MEMBERS WILL BE LINKED BACK TO ALL THEIR POSTS IN THE NEW SYSTEM AFTER YOU LOGIN.

www.TheModernVocalistWorld.com

IF YOU ARE A NEW VISITOR THAT JUST JOINED US, YOU ARE INVITED TO COME OVER TO OUR NEW FORUM SYSTEM. CLICK THIS LINK TO GO THERE AND REGISTER.

am i the only one who just finds a lot of this gets taken care of by the support?

support has so much to do with it. it's when you can transfer the tension to the lower core, take the work with the entire body that singing really started coming together for me. everything above becomes so "available" and freedom gets released....

then you just sing....

while i feel i will try to get better for the rest of my life, i am at a point where things are really falling into place where i can say "yes" this is getting to pro level.

i'm on a roll lately, and i think it has a lot to do with really understand how the voice works and then working with your voice like he's a friend, a partner in the whole thing.

am i the only one who just finds a lot of this gets taken care of by the support?

support has so much to do with it.

I was thinking that but being a beginner I do get things confused. I just found what I believe may be support. (I know it is dumb to mention anything when you just discovered something). But if you are feeling the release point and keeping that edge of closure and support pressure without letting go of it wouldn't the vowel modify as long as you do not fight against it?

"Knock me down, It's all in vain. I'll get right back on my feet again." Pat Benatar

Re: KTVA VS 4pillars VS CVI

well i believe very much about the vowel being key to ascent in the notes.

but i'm reffering to a "mental" narrowing.. for example sing the line but have in your mind "oo" works magic for me with going up like a thin tunnel.....and you get this ring off the palatte..and you just know your in the pocket. it's accurate.

damn, i was i could explain things better....

you can't be thinking.."okay, i'm getting close to d4 or e4 or whatever, time to switch, time to modify, time to bridge....

Re: KTVA VS 4pillars VS CVI

Martin H wrote:

Owen,

Not exactly. When you begin to close the mouth on the rounded vowels you once again run into troubles in regards to acoustic overloading. EH and OH are your best choice.

Okay I know that, that's why I asked about the unrounded oh in the first place. But let's say the schwa in the middle - same tongue height just in between the eh and oh in backness - that would work as well, correct?

I honestly kind of already know the answer, of course it works, I'm just wondering why EH and OH are always mentioned but not the schwa in the middle

Re: KTVA VS 4pillars VS CVI

Robert Lunte wrote:

Martin H wrote:

In regards to vowel modifications I believe it's important to be aware of the acoustic overload principle. It's not really so much about the vowel sound and it's formants etc. But mostly about the shape of the upper vocal tract that this vowel creates. For instance the EH and OH vowel creates the largest opening in the upper vocal tract and therefore more sound can pass through hence the possibility to create the loudest sounds.

Another example is the AH vowel. Most people and actually also a lot of teachers consider this to be an open vowel (which is true in phonetics; IPA) but physiologically it's actually not creating an "open throat" (the upper vocal tract is quite closed) and hence not as much sound can pass through as in EH or OH.

My point is, in this example, you'll never be able to sing as loud on AH as on EH or OH. Which is also why AH is usually modified towards OH the higher you sing. Understanding this acoustic principle is crucial but unfortunately only a few teachers know about it, at least directly. Which IMO is very evident in the fact that a lot of teachers like to use this AH vowel a lot.

EXCELLENT!

I have to agree, I see a lot of emphasis on "Ah" training and I think that has value, but to call it an "open" vowel... ? No. My physical experience of "Ah" is a closed feeling. Its not open, free and windy like "Eh", or "Ae" or "Uh" vowels... it pulls and tugs and is quite clunky until you train it. Regardless, its not an open vowel.

I can't say I disagree but somehow I've found "ah" helpful in training an open throat sensation - perhaps because it is more closed and the challenge is to figure out how to not choke on it. The same could be said with ee and oo I suppose except for some reason those feel a lot more closed to me.

Another question for Martin if he's around - I've heard that "ah" has the highest passaggio entry point (due to the highest first formant), is that still true despite its acoustic overload effect?

And maybe that could be why "ah" works so great for training resistance and late bridging - whereas if you try to bridge late with ee and oo you'll choke a lot harder since you're not only fighting acoustic overload, but also misaligned formants.

Re: KTVA VS 4pillars VS CVI

About the "ah" vowel.. I found that when I use "ah" in training, and even high notes (for me, a high note is above A4), that the note rings. So, I always use "ah".. In everything high. I have to modify, of course because not all high notes are strictly on "ah" (lol). I modify more towards "ah" than "uh" for this reason. Old Roy Khan personifies a perfect "ah" modification - you can hear it in almost any high note or scream that he sings in his Conception stuff. Also, I agree that training "ah" gets me through my first break a whole lot easier than the other vowels did. I am getting so that I can get through with "ee" better, but to me it just isn't as easy as "ah". In the end, pillars has a lot of "ah" training in it, which is perfect for me , since I want to be able to emulate the Roy Khan style "ah" ringy head voice stuff!

Re: KTVA VS 4pillars VS CVI

I watched his YouTube video of him covering She's Gone, and it seems like he was modifying to Ah ALOT in the chorus. I am not familiar with his terminology, so I can't answer about curbing and stuff...

Re: KTVA VS 4pillars VS CVI

Keith wrote:

I watched his YouTube video of him covering She's Gone, and it seems like he was modifying to Ah ALOT in the chorus. I am not familiar with his terminology, so I can't answer about curbing and stuff...

"curbing" is not Ken's talk-track... that is CVI and now TVS uses it as well. Ken doesn't define any acoustic modes. CVI and TVS do.

Re: KTVA VS 4pillars VS CVI

Robert Lunte wrote:

Keith wrote:

I watched his YouTube video of him covering She's Gone, and it seems like he was modifying to Ah ALOT in the chorus. I am not familiar with his terminology, so I can't answer about curbing and stuff...

"curbing" is not Ken's talk-track... that is CVI and now TVS uses it as well. Ken doesn't define any acoustic modes. CVI and TVS do.

Re: KTVA VS 4pillars VS CVI

Robert Lunte wrote:

Overdrive an "Ah"... = very pushy and weird pulling sensations. Which is why so much "Ah" concerns me, unless you really know what your doing.

Ken Tamplin doesn't actually sing Ah vowels on high notes, nor does he teach it. He tells people to have an Ah "in the sound", but also to modify towards Oh, Uh and Oo the higher you go. And he teaches to make those vowel switches at the same places every time. So you could say that he doesn't advocate late bridging at all - IF the definition of bridging is only vowel switching. What Ken could be talking about when he tells people to pull chest, is to very gradually over time try to increase volume.

Re: KTVA VS 4pillars VS CVI

Owen,

In regards to schwa it could work if it's unrounded. Yes the AH vowel has a very high first formant despite the acoustic limitation on that vowel. The acoustic overload effect is more important in regards to bridging than the formants. For instance, if you keep a low volume you can use all vowels without modifying in your entire range (hence all kinds of formant settings). It's only when the volume rises that the acoustic overload becomes a concern. Actually the formant strategies we observe in the passaggio is often simply a byproduct of avoiding the acoustic overload effect.

To all,

I would just like to stress that it's only when singing loud in the higher range that the AH vowel has it's limitation due to the acoustic overload. If the volume is low to medium then there's no problem.

To make it simple, the more closed the vowel the less volume you can use.

Re: KTVA VS 4pillars VS CVI

Martin H wrote:

Owen,

In regards to schwa it could work if it's unrounded. Yes the AH vowel has a very high first formant despite the acoustic limitation on that vowel. The acoustic overload effect is more important in regards to bridging than the formants. For instance, if you keep a low volume you can use all vowels without modifying in your entire range (hence all kinds of formant settings). It's only when the volume rises that the acoustic overload becomes a concern. Actually the formant strategies we observe in the passaggio is often simply a byproduct of avoiding the acoustic overload effect.

To all,

I would just like to stress that it's only when singing loud in the higher range that the AH vowel has it's limitation due to the acoustic overload. If the volume is low to medium then there's no problem.

To make it simple, the more closed the vowel the less volume you can use.

i like the way you said that last statement as I am always trying to get singers to understand the Pitch vowel intensity principles but thats far easier to say and understand. thanks for that.

Disclaimer-Anything I write or try to help people with on here are techniques and things that have worked for ME. They are not necessarily" right" or "wrong" but have worked for ME and my 20+ yrs as a professional working singer.Thank you

Re: KTVA VS 4pillars VS CVI

Martin H wrote:

I would just like to stress that it's only when singing loud in the higher range that the AH vowel has it's limitation due to the acoustic overload. If the volume is low to medium then there's no problem.

Martin - with loud singing, and if I don't modify the "ah" vowel it seems to produce stress and fatigue quickly which is the acoustical overload. And what is creating the stress - is it an impedance mismatch? (loss of supra glottal pressure) I'm theorizing that the impedance mismatch requires much more muscular effort to hold the folds in place, at the right tension, whereas if the impedance was matched the muscular effort is greatly reduced. Am I on the right track here?

Re: KTVA VS 4pillars VS CVI

geno wrote:

Martin - with loud singing, and if I don't modify the "ah" vowel it seems to produce stress and fatigue quickly which is the acoustical overload. And what is creating the stress - is it an impedance mismatch? (loss of supra glottal pressure) I'm theorizing that the impedance mismatch requires much more muscular effort to hold the folds in place, at the right tension, whereas if the impedance was matched the muscular effort is greatly reduced. Am I on the right track here?

Re: KTVA VS 4pillars VS CVI

geno wrote:

Martin H wrote:

I would just like to stress that it's only when singing loud in the higher range that the AH vowel has it's limitation due to the acoustic overload. If the volume is low to medium then there's no problem.

Martin - with loud singing, and if I don't modify the "ah" vowel it seems to produce stress and fatigue quickly which is the acoustical overload. And what is creating the stress - is it an impedance mismatch? (loss of supra glottal pressure) I'm theorizing that the impedance mismatch requires much more muscular effort to hold the folds in place, at the right tension, whereas if the impedance was matched the muscular effort is greatly reduced. Am I on the right track here?

Yes, I like this point in regards to impedance and overload... it is true, that unless I back off on "Ah", it just grabs and chokes up. Good posts going on here... perhaps working with that, instead of relenting, becomes healthy resistance training? There is an interesting question that emerges... if the resistance created from too much supra-glottal pressure begins to "push" back, can that be used for resistance training to grow stronger?

Re: KTVA VS 4pillars VS CVI

CunoDante wrote:

Most singers I've encountered can sing that broad AH louder than they can any other vowel. While they do get a fair bit of volume on EH or OH (depending on how they do it), the AH is the real volume producer. This is the reason a lot of female belters switch to AH when they get in the range of Bb4-D5 -- it just produces more volume. The same also holds true for male voices up to around an Ab4/A4.

I always thought that females modify toward AH around then (as high as Eb5) when belting in order to maintain H1/F2 tuning as the pitch rises. The same would be true for males up to AH at C5, going with CVT's overdrive limits here. This is how I understand CVT overdrive as working - for some reason they mention that modification, but it's obvious when you listen to it! If not already evident in the CVT sound files, just listen to any great singer belting with that open quality - if they maintain that overdrive belty quality as high as possible, at the topmost point they're singing AH or AE - no question about it, no way around it. If they kept the pure eh they wouldn't be tuning the formant effectively for the loudest tone.

While we're on the topic of Ah, has anybody else noticed there's kind of a big "dead spot" with it (if you don't modify)? Talking about the broad Ah here, or the same is true with Ae. The thing is, let's say for a male voice - you can tune F1/H3 up to the F4 - then if you keep that first formant pure and as bright as possible without changing it, you won't get to F1/H2 until C5. So between F4 and C5 if you don't modify you have to rely on the upper formants to give you resonance. Just fascinating to think about...

I mean this dead spot does exist with every vowel, but for Ah and Ae it is the highest.

I'm not really saying much here just thinking aloud. In case someone would like to note a practical conclusion to derive from that information.

Re: KTVA VS 4pillars VS CVI

...But I learned overdrive by using Eh/Oh, so perhaps Ah is not the best vowel for beginners. I don't have the most recent edition of CVT, but in the one I have, Ah is recognized as a very useful overdrive-vowel on lower pitches.More recently, they seem to have found that the relationship between vowels and mode remains the same throughout the voice, so from that perspective it seems reasonable that the Ah vowel should work well on high notes as well.

Re: KTVA VS 4pillars VS CVI

Martin H wrote:

In regards to vowel modifications I believe it's important to be aware of the acoustic overload principle. It's not really so much about the vowel sound and it's formants etc. But mostly about the shape of the upper vocal tract that this vowel creates. For instance the EH and OH vowel creates the largest opening in the upper vocal tract and therefore more sound can pass through hence the possibility to create the loudest sounds.

Accoustic overloading, resonance and impedance are all the same. You can not consider accoustic overloading without considering the poles...

And loudness itself is not the matter. More opening allow higher sound pressure levels, loudness/projection can be achieved using the singer formant.

Re: KTVA VS 4pillars VS CVI

CunoDante wrote:

Robert Lunte wrote:

it is true, that unless I back off on "Ah", it just grabs and chokes up. Good posts going on here... perhaps working with that, instead of relenting, becomes healthy resistance training?

The AH is one of the best ways to strengthen the voice. But it has to be the RIGHT KIND of AH. As I mentioned before, a lot of beginning students of technique have a hard time producing this bright, open, clear AH and need specific work to learn it. Sometimes they struggle because they don't know how to keep the throat relaxed; sometimes because they don't open the mouth enough; sometimes because they aren't using enough chest; sometimes because they can't find enough twang; etc. It is a great diagnostic vowel, but also a great strength builder too. It will point out a lot of your weak areas for you.

Look at this clip of Tonéx (B.Slade) singing "Why". He keeps this pure, open AH all the way up and down the voice, because his voice is coordinated enough to handle it. Listen to the top notes of the run at 1:30-1:41 -- that's the bright kind of AH I'm talking about. Same for the high note at 2:02. From 3:10-3:20, tons of AH vowels in there ranging from Eb4-Bb4. From 4:00-4:04, another good AH. From 4:10-4:25, he keeps repeating "why" up and down the scale. Perfect examples of the pure AH.

I find that several examples of "Ah" pointed out in this discussion are really more shaded to IPA "Ae"... I don't hear "Ah" in these samples Dante, I hear a predominance of "Ae" (cat).... which makes total sense, given that "Ae" is easier and can achieve pretty much the same result.

Re: KTVA VS 4pillars VS CVI

CunoDante wrote:

@Martin

Since there was a recent thread about Jessie J, I thought I'd bring her up here, because she is a good example of a singer who has the AH in her voice. Listen to the "no no no no" from 4:47-4:52. On the lower notes, she's doing OH, but on the top most notes, I hear the pure AH. How would you describe the vowel in this sound?

Re: KTVA VS 4pillars VS CVI

... given the two examples above and knowing that the higher we are in frequency, the vowels become more homogenized and less discerning... we find that a language "oh" or "ah" can modify adequately to "uh" or "ae" and nobody can tell the difference... its all very academic and interesting for us geeks... but once you get into the 5th octave and start squeaking and whistling... all vowels begin to kinda smudge into a singularity that is neither a pure Ah, Ae, Oh, Uh or anything.

Re: KTVA VS 4pillars VS CVI

dante, that last sentence was it.

frisell said it best when he said divorce yourself from vowels being related to speech and just view them as nothing but throat shapes. you are going to learn to configure throat shapes. it was epic advice to me.

Re: KTVA VS 4pillars VS CVI

CunoDante wrote:

So, it's because of this confusion that I was asking specifically what type of AH you personally were referring to. Would you be able to upload a short clip of you speaking it the way you have in mind? I think that would clear things up more than referring to the IPA.

The sound examples given in those links are the sound I have in mind. That's why I posted them. I'm fully aware that the IPA is not completely solid as a written form and various countries even have there own version (I have had my share of transcribing LOL). But in those links sound examples are included.

Re: KTVA VS 4pillars VS CVI

Also in regards to the AH versus OH. It's important to notice that when the OH is unrounded it can sound a bit like AH for some people.

But again, no matter what people hear due to the phonology of their language, the overload principle is universal. It's a simple physical fact that higher amplitudes can pass through a larger tube than a smaller one. So the more closed the vowel the less volume you can use. People can try it themselves, take two straws with a different diameter and try out trough which one they can produce the loudest sound.

It's also evident in natural responses. I've yet to hear someone naturally shout H-EE, H-OO or H-AH when someone is steeling their car.

Re: KTVA VS 4pillars VS CVI

In my experience on high fullvoice notes like c5-and up you don't say nuh-oo which is "no" the diphthong. You say nuh just like Jesse did it,because going from an open sound like nuh to a closed vowel like oo is gonna be extremely hard night after night that high up in your range in pop music

Disclaimer-Anything I write or try to help people with on here are techniques and things that have worked for ME. They are not necessarily" right" or "wrong" but have worked for ME and my 20+ yrs as a professional working singer.Thank you

Disclaimer-Anything I write or try to help people with on here are techniques and things that have worked for ME. They are not necessarily" right" or "wrong" but have worked for ME and my 20+ yrs as a professional working singer.Thank you

Re: KTVA VS 4pillars VS CVI

Disclaimer-Anything I write or try to help people with on here are techniques and things that have worked for ME. They are not necessarily" right" or "wrong" but have worked for ME and my 20+ yrs as a professional working singer.Thank you

Re: KTVA VS 4pillars VS CVI

Danielformica wrote:

yeah but what is aaaaaagggghhh? i don't know? i say ow!

Hmm, not sure why you haven't heard the other sound much, but we can use "ow" for example too - my point is these natural responses to pain are not done on EH or OH vowels that Martin is saying are acoustically optimal yet these primitive "ah" or "ow" screams still seem to be very loud sometimes...

This is kind of veering off track though, I'm not sure this type of discussion is going to make me a better singer or you folks better teachers...

Disclaimer-Anything I write or try to help people with on here are techniques and things that have worked for ME. They are not necessarily" right" or "wrong" but have worked for ME and my 20+ yrs as a professional working singer.Thank you

Re: KTVA VS 4pillars VS CVI

I'll tell you why we say "aaaaargh" when we're we're in pain and "hey" when someone is stealing your car.

If you say the Ah vowel with lots of volume but also quite a bit of vocal cord compression (like when you have a tummy ache), the voice usually distorts slightly and then you have a sound that everyone recognizes as someone being in pain. You don't necessarily want as much volume as humanly possible. You want (subconciously) a sound that describes the pain you're in and that aaaargh is usually what humans utter when in pain, or something similar.

Now, if someone is stealing your car, shouting an "aaaargh" with distortion and not the biggest vowel in the world is a bad idea because above else, you want to be HEARD. So you instinctively choose the biggest vowel and try to be as loud as possible (without thinking about it, because you're thinking of your car, right?).

Or, in the case of most of us vocal nerds here, we would actually think and analyze all that in our heads and when we're done, the car thief is far away with our car. Then we go "aaaargh".

Re: KTVA VS 4pillars VS CVI

Martin H wrote:

But again, no matter what people hear due to the phonology of their language, the overload principle is universal. It's a simple physical fact that higher amplitudes can pass through a larger tube than a smaller one. So the more closed the vowel the less volume you can use. People can try it themselves, take two straws with a different diameter and try out trough which one they can produce the loudest sound.

Well, it matters because what people will do will depend on that phonology. It actually prevents someone to even understand what you are trying to say without knowing exactly the vowel you mention.

And, its not really that the "amplitude can't pass", but rather that a larger opening on the exit of the tube transfers power more efficiently to the ambient (better coupling).

Re: KTVA VS 4pillars VS CVI

While we're on the subject, I must say that I don't understand why Ken Tamplin tells people to modify from Ah, to Oh, to Uh. Why not go directly from Ah to Uh? Why the sudden increase in vowel and then sudden decrease?

Re: KTVA VS 4pillars VS CVI

Funny, just an hour ago I was admiring my 6-week-old girl's belting technique and trying to look inside her mouth. The sound is bright, and the throat is totally open. What struck me as interesting was that the tongue was "cupped" so it was a funnel around the bottom gums, but it rose up into a cup. And the mouth was wide open, of course.

And the vowel she "sang" was "ää," that is "ae." That is also the vowel I feel is the easiest to brighten and build into a very resonant tone no matter how high or low it's sung. Easiest meaning the easiest to configure into a non-constricted/strainless sound.

Re: KTVA VS 4pillars VS CVI

Owen Korzec wrote:

Re: KTVA VS 4pillars VS CVI

Khassera wrote:

Funny, just an hour ago I was admiring my 6-week-old girl's belting technique and trying to look inside her mouth. The sound is bright, and the throat is totally open. What struck me as interesting was that the tongue was "cupped" so it was a funnel around the bottom gums, but it rose up into a cup. And the mouth was wide open, of course.

And the vowel she "sang" was "ää," that is "ae." That is also the vowel I feel is the easiest to brighten and build into a very resonant tone no matter how high or low it's sung. Easiest meaning the easiest to configure into a non-constricted/strainless sound.

Firstly, congrats on the baby! It's funny how we all struggle to hit these super high belting notes with distortion and babies literally do it effortlessly... even if a baby has thinner folds the distortion too is amaazing. Certainly would get any mother or father's attention.

I should edit my original post since I've heard "ae" too - definitely a cousin of the vowels Eh and Ih.

Also: to make this post less random. Ken Tamplin makes use of "ae" as well at the bottom of the scale I believe TVS uses Eh a lot. Last but not least - CVT uses "Ih" as a curbing vowel.